Posted on 08/20/2007 9:13:06 AM PDT by John Jorsett
When Pajamas Media heard the authenticity questions surrounding the “Baghdad Diarist” articles by Scott Thomas Beauchamp in The New Republic, we asked our Washington Editor Richard Miniter to look into how the respected opinion magazine could once again be the locus of such a scandal.
Miniter spoke with several people involved in the extraordinary story, including the whistle-blower and a German woman who was Beauchamp’s fiancée until just before he married, of all people, Miniter discovered, a fact-checker at The New Republic. That fiancée said of her former boyfriend, the soldier/reporter: “He hates the army. The only reason he joined was because he wanted to have more experience to write about.”
Read on for that and other explanations of how The New Republic got suckered.
[This is a very long piece, but very interesting reading.]
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:45 PM by Tzimisce Edit
How about “Fairness” in Journalism?
Okay - so the New Republic has been featuring stories from “The Bagdad Diarist”, a soldier in Iraq who is blogging the horrors of American soldiers on innocent Iraqis. Since leaking this guy’s name wouldn’t compromise our national security, the New Republic refused to give out any info on this guy. It took suspicious Conservative bloggers to track down who this guy is: Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp.
No sooner than his name was released, he confessed that he made everything up. The New Republic’s response was typical of know it all left wing media types: oops our bad, now on to other news.
So there you have what’s wrong in the US today, right wing commentators on the radio. Hopefully Congress will get right on their overhaul of freedom of speech and stop these awful hosts from beaming out what they’ll freely tell us are their opinions and trying to influence politics their way.
Seriously though, when are politicians going to decide that Journalists need to be “balanced”? I know what you’re thinking, Journalists have free press - but I figure that the channels of speech are a public form and as such the people should be able to regulate what goes out over them.
Yes our Constitution says that the Government (which is comprised of “the People”) can’t do that but in a world where McCain Feingold is okay, why not?
The New Republic is lying to us. If nothing else, they’re guilty of fraud. They want to hide behind the fact that they didn’t know this guy was making up stories. But isn’t it their job to find out?
The media is biased. They had preformulated conclusions and they try to hammer every story in to those conclusions. (Wasn’t it the Seattle Times news room that cheered when Rove resigned?) If there was an unknown blogger in Iraq writing that yes, there are WMDs and we helped move them last night, there is not a doubt in my mind that New Republic reporters would be digging in to the story (if they considered it worth mentioning at all.) Not only would they know everything about the author, everything that even seemed mildly suspicious would be taken in to account: from his father voting for Bush 41 to his Uncle that had a yard sign supporting Bush 43 in ‘04. Any story written would mention at least ten times that the source isn’t necessarily reliable and the phrase “rumored too” would be featured in every other line.
I’d rather take one Al Franken reporting the news on his bogus radio show than ten New Republics. I know where Franken stands: he’s a partisan hack and doesn’t pretend to be anything other than. He doesn’t insult me by trying to tell me that he’s not trying to win in the political arena the way news reporters are.
I’m a hack too. I’m not reporting anything, I’m simply commenting on it.
The New Republic is guilty of fraud. What I wonder is if making up the news is a new thing or if they’re just now getting caught in the modern day thanks to watch dogs on the internet.
But the left wing of this country isn’t going to do anything about lying and deceiving news agencies cause these places help get them elected. And the stupid left wing voter will continue to use these frauds as sources of information.
The New Republic got suckered for the same reason Dan Rather got suckered - the stories fit their preconceptions so they brushed aside clear evidence of problems with the stories.
And if I had the misfortune to work for the rag in question, I'd be going to and coming from work with a bag over my head.
There are none so blind...
BUMP
Simple answer: BDS. They, like all their Leftist boyfriends, are so eager to bring down a conservative (sic) government in time of war, they will run anything that comes across the monitor, sight unseen.
Most likely, their "fact-checking" consists of a word scan of any submitted copy, with a search count of keywords, like "illegal war", "war crimes", and "Bush Junior". Meeting their threshold number indicates it's a sound piece of work.
The answer is that you prosecute for TREASON all up the chain of command at the New Republic for publishing enemy propaganda as “news”.
PROSECUTE violators now (they LIED) and they will perform more FACT checking in the future. You can call it selfcensorship if you want but there is NO freedom of speech for what they did nor is there for libel, slander, perjury, or wrongly yelling fire in a crowded movie theater.
“[R]espected opinion magazine”. Respected by whom?
The reason they published Beauchamp’s “diaries” is because it fit their agenda. No checking needed, thank you.
I'm never the one that would suggest lawsuits but instead of regulating speech ('cause that's the path to h*ll) how about file suit for fraud? These publications/networks are perpetrating fraud upon Americans.
JERRY: So George, how do I beat this lie detector?
GEORGE: I'm sorry, Jerry I can't help you.
JERRY: Come on, you've got the gift. You're the only one that can help me.
GEORGE: Jerry, I can't. It's like saying to Pavorotti, "Teach me to sing like you."
JERRY: All right, well I've got to go take this test. I can't believe I'm doing this.
GEORGE: Jerry, just remember. It's not a lie... if you believe it.
< /seinfeld >
William Muny: “Letters'n such?”
This antiAmerican lying liar needs to rot in prison for 10 or 12 years. And his editor too.
Now, he has more wrinkles, lots more money, but the same, self-centered egotism that I recall from almost 50 years ago. Some people change. John Kerry hasn't changed a bit. He's the same, shallow, social climber that I first met at the Yale Political Union.
Congressman Billybob
The thing I like most about the internet is that it’s proving to be the real ‘fact checking’ for the mainstream media. In the past, this kind of thing would probably have never been caught, but now a horde of nosy bloggers and other interested parties will investigate, pester, question, and generally poke around until the truth is known. And what’s even better is that the MSM sure doesn’t like getting the scrutiny it’s accustomed to giving others.
It’s called “confirmation bias” and we are all subject to it.
Nothing will happen past the soldier (that's if the liar is punished at all). I'm looking at the overall problem. What hurts them is $$$, a few hefty pay outs could make them (leftist media)think twice about publishing fairy tails
This guy would make a great Senator! [barf]
I did not know that Reeve was a TNR fact-checker. I did not know that a magazine of that prominence employed only three. I did not know that they considered it essentially an entry-level position. Knowing that it seems less shocking that TNR had such a huge blind spot.
And so the only guy fired was a gay conservative - that's what he gets for leaving the reservation - and that was not for culpability in this embarrassment but helping to reveal it. What seems clear at this point is that the original accusations that it was all about the narrative, not the facts, were true. There are evidently quite a few journalists who do not consider that a fault. That's very sad.
“Yes our Constitution says that the Government (which is comprised of “the People”) can’t do that but in a world where McCain Feingold is okay, why not?” Tz
False premise, McCain/Fiengold is NOT ok.
You should take head to Patrick Henry’s words:
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty, suspect anyone who approaches that jewel, for nothing will protect it but downright force, and whenever you give up that force you are inevitably ruined” (from memory errors mine)
Capris are for women moment!
The man has never earned an honest dollar in his life.
Proof that the "Debunking" of the Scott Thomas Beauchamp Story was a Conspiracy to Defraud ___ Huff Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/proof-that-the-debunking_b_60647.html
There is one lone brave soul on the Huff site defending TRUTH as an absolute value, but they will have none of it.
Liberals see what they believe, Conservatives believe what they see.
That fact was known here on the first day that Beauchamp came forward. There was no reason for the press to "miss" it.
-PJ
|
|
These contacts never go where I want them to! |
I don’t believe that The New Republic was suckered. They’re simply trying to increase subscriptions, and the fact that they’re willing to print obvious lies to defame the U.S. Armed Forces will cause more of the demented left to subscribe. The publicity surrounding the episode is not hurting either.
later read
"Do not fear the enemy, for your enemy can only take your life. It is far better that you fear the media, for they will steal your HONOR. That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain
*Apparently the first two sentences cannot be found in Twain's writing. The last sentence has been proven, both to be Twain's and to be completely factual and truthful. The entire thought or sentiment is more so true today than ever before, with the exception that "ditching and shoe making" have been substituted by now asking if you want fries with that hamburger.
Maybe the word he used (if it's a genuine paraphrase) was "press" ? Or snot-nosed scribblers?
Anyway, good quote even if not all Twain's.
BUMP!
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.